WHY DID JESUS HAVE TO GET BAPTIZED?

One question I have always wondered about is why in the world Jesus needed to be baptized by John. This event must mean a lot since it is recorded in all four gospels: Matthew 3:13-17; Mark 1:9-11; Luke 3:21-22; and John 1:29-34. The whole subject of baptism was extremely important to the church tradition in which I was raised. And I recall that the only time this question came up, our pastor would simply state that Jesus did it strictly as an example for us to follow. But now I question whether that was really an adequate response. After all, John's baptism was a sign of repentance for sins, and their forgiveness according to Luke 3:3. And what sins did Jesus have to repent of? 

F.F. Bruce points out that this issue posed a problem for the early church. Thus, we have copies of an early (probably pre-170 AD) document entitled Gospel According to the Hebrews in which the story of Jesus' baptism is told in an entirely different way. According to this “Gospel,” Jesus first refused to go with his family to get baptized by John by stating, “What sin have I committed, that I should go and be baptized by him? – unless perchance this very thing that I have said is a sin of ignorance.”

In addition, how could Jesus' actions even relate to Christian baptism, which has a somewhat different symbolism and purpose: (1) our association with Christ in his death and resurrection and (2) our walking in newness of life through the in-dwelling Holy Spirit. Even John himself pointed out the vast difference between his type of baptism and the one that would be associated with the Messiah (see Matthew 3:11-12; Luke 3:15-17; and John 1:33). John also mentioned how inappropriate it was for Jesus to come to him for baptism (Matthew 3:14). One could possibly reply to the second aspect of Christian baptism by saying that the Holy Spirit did descend at Jesus' baptism, and even remained with Jesus (see John 1:33-34). But that was certainly not the case for any of the other people that John baptized. Just look at the story in Acts 19:1-7 concerning the Ephesian followers of John who had not even heard of the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps Jesus made a mistake in getting baptized at all. However, that explanation becomes even more far-fetched considering the fact that right after the event, God pointedly says, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (See Mathew 1:11; Mark 1:11; and Luke 3:22.)

Looking at Matthew's account of the baptism, one can see that it actually does state why Jesus needed to be baptized – “in order to fulfill all righteousness.” But I am afraid that doesn't really clear up anything at all, for me at least. So I looked at some alternative translations of Matthew 3:15:

    NEB: “We do well to conform in this way with all that God requires.”

    Living Bible: “I must do all that is right.”

    J.B. Phillips: “It is right for us to meet all the Law's demands.”

    The Message: “God's work, putting things right all these centuries, is coming together right now in this baptism.”

    TEV: “In this way we shall do all that God requires.”

    JB: “It is fitting that we should, in this way, do all that righteousness demands.”

These other renderings certainly do not conform with my pastors' consensus on the reason for Jesus' baptism. On the other hand, I am still not at all sure what Jesus meant by his words. So let's see what scholarly opinion is on the subject. A great starting point for any study on the subject of baptism is Beasley-Murray's exhaustive treatment in Baptism in the New Testament. He actually devotes over 20 pages to the consideration of Jesus' baptism by John, beginning with the observation that modern commentaries seem to, for the large part, skip over the reason Jesus came to John entirely. But that judgment was made back in 1964. Fortunately, since then the literature on the subject has grown tremendously.

Beasley-Murray outlines the four basic reasons that scholars have given for the necessity of Jesus to have been baptized.

    A. Jesus was not yet sinless at this point in his life. (Strauss, Murry, Weiss)

    B. Jesus needed to show support for John's revival movement.

    C. His baptism served to confirm his role as the Messiah.

    D. The Suffering Servant conception in Isaiah's message required that the Messiah become completely associated with His sinful people.

I think that most Christians would have a hard time accepting Reason A. But Grassmick echoes the other three possibilities, phrasing them somewhat differently. Thus,

    B. “It was an act of obedience, showing that Jesus was in full agreement with God's overall plan and the role of John's baptism with it.”

    C. “It was an act of self-dedication to His messianic mission signifying His official acceptance and entrance into it.”

    D. “It was an act of self-identification with the nation of Israel.”

Other commentators weigh in on these same possible reasons for Jesus' baptism:

    B. de Silva says that Jesus “identifies himself with John's work by undergoing immersion himself. This need not imply that Jesus thought himself to be sinful and in need of repentance...” Loisy similarly points out, “The baptism of repentance did not render guilty those who received it without sin.”

The Jerusalem Bible appends a footnote to Matthew 3:15 explaining: “Though sinless, Jesus is determined to submit to John's baptism because he sees it as part of God's design and the last act preparatory to the messianic era; by accepting it he expresses his wish to satisfy the saving 'righteousness' of God that governs the whole plan of salvation. Matthew is probably thinking not only of the act of baptism but of the new 'righteousness' which, through Christ, is going to fulfill and perfect that of the old Law, cf. 5:17,20.”

    C. “God's covenant faithfulness (righteousness) finds focused expression in John's baptism, which is the divine anointing and initiation of Jesus' ministry of redemption and restoration.” (Cummins)

    D. “Jesus received baptism from John by way of identifying Himself with sinners in anticipation of His doing so to even greater purpose in His crucifixion.” (Short) J.A. Martin expresses the same belief: “In His baptism Jesus identified Himself with sinners though He was not a sinner.” This is echoed by Brower who states that the baptism signified “Jesus' full identification with his people in their need.” Barbieri goes so far as to say that “identified” is the real meaning of the word “baptized.”

“In the conviction that the Gospels demand the recognition that Jesus was baptized, as all others, for sin, the view is becoming dominant that in His baptism He took the first step in bearing the sins of the world.” (Beasley-Murray)

    C and D. Nixon combines of these two options with the words: “Most commentators see the baptism of Jesus not only as a commissioning for His ministry (cf. 21:23-27) but also as a symbolic recapitulation of the Exodus from Egypt, performed by Jesus the new Israel and bringer of the new Exodus of salvation (cf. 1 Cor. 10:1-4).” He goes on to say that fulfilling all righteousness “seems to mean that He accepted the divine plan and vocation and identified Himself with the remnant within Israel.”

Completely intertwined with this whole issue is the exact meaning that the key word “righteousness” (diakaiosyne) takes on in Matthew's Gospel. One the one hand, we have Hagner stating that in four of its appearances it refers to “the ethical conduct to which disciples of Jesus are called. In 5:6 it may be translated justice. And in 3:15 and 21:32 righteousness in the sense of God's saving activity, rather than ethical behavior per se, may be in view.”

J.K. Brown similarly states that “It is often argued that all seven uses of dikaiosyne have the same sense...Nevertheless, it is more likely that Matthew draws on a range of its possible senses. Concerning Matthew 3:15 specifically, he says, “Here dikaiosyne can hardly refer to Jesus' own adherence to the law; baptism was not such a requirement. Instead, given the promises to Israel from Isaiah 40..., it is likely that diakaiosyne refers to God's covenant faithfulness to promises of restoration begun in the ministries of John and Jesus.”

In sharp contrast to those opinions, Yeung feels that Matthew uses 'righteousness' in the same way in all seven appearances, referring “to one's ethical response to God by obeying and doing God's righteous will.” In Matthew 3:15, “'righteousness' reveals the most characteristic feature of who Jesus is: Jesus, the Messiah, is the Son of God, who humbly obeys the will of God.” Spencer is in agreement with this statement by seeing an emphasis in Matthew “on active righteousness or doing the will of God...”

It is intriguing to me, but perhaps an aside from the topic at hand, that the seven occurrences of this Greek word in Matthew form a symmetrical pattern when considering the respective contexts in which they appear:

John's ministry of repentance (3:15)

    Those who hunger and thirst for righteousness will be filled (5:6)

        The eternal reward for those persecuted in this life (5:10)

            Your righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees (5:20)

        No eternal reward for those who seek earthly acclaim (6:1)

    Strive first for the kingdom of God (6:33)

John's ministry of repentance (21:32)

Thus, one would expect that the first and last appearances of diakiosyne would have special affinities with one another. And in fact, that is what Hagner states (see above).”

I am not sure whether this brief discussion is at all definitive in reaching an answer to the original question that I posed. But at the least, it should serve as a lesson to all of us not to simply accept a facile answer to a difficult question concerning the Bible. God's word is filled with layers upon layers of meaning which only become a little clearer upon deep study and contemplation. If the Word were easily comprehended, I would doubt that it is the Word at all, considering the unfathomable nature of God Himself.